合理认识怀疑论

怀疑论是一种独特而悠久的哲学学说，它以克服独断论为目的，以人类既有认识为反思对象，以哲学思辩和抽象思维能力为基础，是一种怀疑客观世界的真实存在和获得客观真理的可能性的学说。鉴于人们对它的传统批判往往过于简单化，有必要重新认识怀疑论。本文从性质、论题、程度等角度对怀疑论进行了具体的分类分层研究，从性质角度看，怀疑论包括“本体论的怀疑主义”、“认识论的怀疑主义”、“方法论的怀疑主义”；就论题而言，怀疑论可分为认知怀疑论、信念怀疑论、行为怀疑论；从程度上说，怀疑论又分为局部怀疑论、全面怀疑论、不完全性怀疑论和完全性怀疑论。文章对怀疑论在哲学中的重要地位和作用进行了深入探讨。并指出怀疑论的两大积极功能，即解构功能和建构功能。文章对我国哲学界关于怀疑论的几种流行观点进行了分析，并提出超越怀疑论，在实践唯物主义的基础上建构合理的怀疑思维     

怀疑方法:一种创造性思维方法

怀疑方法是一种创造性思维方法,是对怀疑论的超越,它对于人类认识和实践都具有重要意义.合理的怀疑方法,是人们在认识和实践活动中,对客观事物的事实性或具体认识、实践的科学性和合理性所作的反思、批判、评价或规范,它具有未定性、辩证性、中介性和实践性.为了促进当代人类活动的科学化、合理化,有必要重建马克思主义的合理怀疑方法.     

关于古代怀疑主义

近年来,希腊哲学的价值正被重新认识。特别是1978年第一次在牛津,1980、1983年在别处召开的有关希腊哲学的学术会议,产生了各自的关于认识论、科学的理论与实践及伦理思想的优秀论文集,引起了更加活跃的争论。最近出版的资料集,改善了以往研究资料简单、不能利用的情况,为今后大力推进研究带来了希望。在重新发现16世纪的皮浪主义及其对以后哲学发展的重大影响的同时,学术界对古代怀疑主义的兴趣与日俱增。古代怀疑主义并非只是考古学的遗产,它揭示了在近现代怀疑主义那里不可得见的多种可能性。下面简要地介绍几个现代学术界关于古代怀疑主义的主要论争点和值得注意的古代与现代怀疑主义的相异点。     

黑格尔的思辨哲学何以能够抵御怀疑主义的挑战?

从古至今,怀疑主义总是像一个幽灵一样纠缠着哲学家,并被视为哲学的一个可怕对手,而黑格尔基于思辨思维——怀疑主义的一种自我扬弃——的思辨哲学之所以能够抵御怀疑主义,即阿格里巴的“五式”的挑战,原因在于：首先,黑格尔思辨哲学的开端是作为主体与客体、思维与存在、有限与无限之统一的绝对,它既是开端也是终点,由此构成一个圆圈,而思辨哲学就是绝对或事情本身自身生命的展开过程或完成过程,即真理自身的运动(回应“无穷倒退”、“假设”和“循环论证”);其次,思辨哲学在一个科学体系中对绝对加以描述,即诸哲学主张或诸意识形态或诸概念本身的自我发展或自我扬弃所构成的序列,并把这个体系理解为思维本身的一种发展,即绝对思维作为体系,是对绝对思维本身作为起点、展开进程和终点的整体把握,而思辨哲学的展开方式则是辩证法,即事情本身的过程(回应“意见分歧”和“相对性”)。     

韦勒克批评理性的困乏

本文以韦勒克对欧洲浪漫主义运动的批评为例，指出韦勒克批评理性的偏失和困惑，分析其根源主要在于对因果规律的绝对怀疑主义和德国中心主义这两个方面     

从“认识文论”走向“审美文论”

以往,人们总是习惯于把“文艺是社会生活的反映”作为思考文艺本质问题的基础。作为观察文艺问题的惟一视角,似乎从未怀疑过它的确切性和正确性,而只是在“生活的内涵是什么”以及“如何反映”上发生争执。随着人们对文艺反映的特殊规定性的寻觅和西方现代哲学研究成果的借鉴,开始对“文艺是社会生活的反映”这一理论视角的惟一性和普遍性发生了怀疑,对认识论文艺学在以往被赋予的涵盖一切文艺现象的“万能”作用提出质疑,对它在以往被赋予的“全方位”的价值提出质疑。面对愈来愈丰富奇幻的文学创作的现象世界和愈来愈频繁激烈的西方哲学及…     

维特根斯坦和海德格尔之后的哲学

作为本世纪的重要哲学家,维特根斯坦和海德格尔消除了“以认识论为中心的哲学”,改变了哲学发展的基础。他们强调实践生活,反对求助于非时间性的真理来为实践辨护的企图,反对表象主义——维氏批判传统的意义理论和指称理论,海氏对传统强调“纯粹看”的首要性表示怀疑。两人都是     

认识论的转换:从逻辑主义到历史主义──重建社会认识论

本文认为,传统认识论在本质上是逻辑主义的,而现代认识论的基本流向则是历史主义。我国哲学工作者要想走上认识论研究的新路子,必须实现从逻辑主义到历史主义的哲学转换,重建社会认识论。 传统认识论解析 传统认识论是指黑格尔哲学以前的认识理论。传统认识论在本质上是逻辑主义(或称逻各斯中心主义)的。 第一,传统认识论把认识的对象──世界(包括人本身及其社会)设想为一架按逻辑程序运转的机器。这个信念不仅支配着各种唯心主义和机械论,而且也支配着各种唯物主义和辩证法思想。 第二,传统认识论把认识的主体简单化、抽象化和逻辑化.我们…     

现代哲学的"划界方法"及其理论意义

"划界方法"作为一种重要的哲学方法在现代哲学中扮演了重要的角色,它超越了"两极"方法的"还原主义"与"化约主义",打破了哲学传统中"两极方法"根深蒂固的统治地位,为人们重新思考和解决本体论、认识论和价值论等各个层面的一系列重大哲学问题开辟了全新的理论视野。"划界方法"显示着哲学智慧全方位的一次转型,体现了现代哲学开启新的理论思路的重大努力。     

人:超越化的动物──广义认识论导论

传统认识论是一种自然主义认识论，其特点是在主客体两极对立的模式中进行思维，忽视人的能动性。本文从自由：意识之本质分析入手，通过对人之超越性的探讨，确认人与自然的关系，即人是自由的、自主的，是属人世界的管理者和创造者。同时，文章认为符号是人之自由实现的工具，语言、神话、宗教等文化现象可以纳入认识论的范围，扩大的认识论可包括文化认识论、社会认识论和自然认识论，由此再构建一个统一的认识论，消除了传统认识论本质主义和还原主义的思维模式，使人拥有“真正的自由王国”。     

被忽略的认知运气--论葛梯尔问题的实质与德性知识论

葛梯尔问题的实质是认知运气。葛梯尔问题被提出以后，知识论者们试图寻找第四个条件来解决此问题，从而形成了以JTB+X的方式来定义知识。 X看似解决了葛梯尔问题，实际上它们都在解决认知运气的问题，同时自身也面临着认知运气的威胁。不论X的提出还是受到的质疑与批判等，都以认知运气为焦点。当JTB+X式的知识分析不能解决问题的时候，一些知识论者对知识的分析产生了质疑，从而走上了对知识的规范性解释，产生了德性知识论。不论是以格雷科为代表的强德性知识论者还是以普理查德为代表的温和的德性知识论者，都致力于认知运气的解决，正是认知运气推动了德性知识论的产生和发展。     

The Nature of Social Responsibility: Exploring Emancipatory Ends

Social responsibility (SR) initiatives within a corporate environment (CSR) continue to be met with deep scepticism. My concern is with exploring this scepticism, which I argue is due to there being more to the underlying objectives of SR than has previously been investigated. I begin by outlining and substantiating my project as a social ontological enquiry, one in which I unpack key concepts to reveal the nature of SR. These ontological findings then underpin my argument that SR is problematically grounded in liberalist thinking, and CSR is in fact just one manifestation of SR. I advance the thesis that SR has emancipatory ends, of meeting human needs and flourishing, and that it is best explicated using feminist care ethics. The argument is then focussed on both shoring up and advancing the emancipatory project of SR. The scepticism of interest is revealed to be the incongruity between care and business; that businesses are deemed as being incompatible with SR, at least in their present capacity. Any claims to the contrary by the business community are branded inauthentic and the aforementioned scepticism ensues. The paper concludes with a brief discussion concerning implications for CSR initiatives and future changes and developments are considered.     

The Epistemological Significance of the Theory of Social Representations

The theory of social representations must be understood in terms of its proper epistemology so that it can accomplish its full potential in social sciences. This is often difficult to achieve because researchers comprehend it in terms of concepts that are part of static and individualistic Newtonian epistemology rather than in terms of dynamic and relational Einsteinian epistemology. This article considers three signposts that Moscovici identifies and analyses in the theory of relativity, namely the relation between epistemology and science, theory and method, and the argument against the explanation of effects by their causes. The following question is posed: are these signposts also characteristic of the theory of social representations? This question is examined focusing on interactional epistemology, theory and method and the diversity of natural thinking and communication. Moscovici's Psychoanalysis shows that natural thinking appears in a plurality of modes according to the situation in which it takes place and according to social groups towards which it is directed. Natural thinking is controversial and communication‐centred. Different professionals, groups and lay people use different kinds of speaking and different communicative genres when they try to resolve “the same” problem. The article suggests that bringing together dialogicality, dialogical linguistics and the theory of social representations may open up new possibilities for theoretical developments in social psychology.     

Towards a critical realist epistemology?

When critical realists consider epistemology they typically start from “epistemological relativism.” We find this position necessary, but we also find it insufficient because it lacks a critique of the highly unequal social relations among observers themselves—relations that shape the very production of knowledge. While it is indeed the case that all knowledge is fallible, it is also the case that all knowledge is positioned, with a particular standpoint. What is more, the social power relations between standpoints organize the production of truth in ways that produce systematic distortions. In this paper, we propose a critical realist social epistemology. We introduce feminist standpoint theory and postcolonial theory as our suggested interventions into critical realism and we use two case studies of existing work to highlight i) the social production of truth and the real, and ii) what is at stake for radicalizing epistemology in critical realism. In so doing, our paper emphasizes the epistemic complexities that continuously shape ontology, a commitment to subaltern voices or experiences, and a thorough interrogation of the relations between positions of knowledge production.     

张载认识论研究的回顾与反思

以“德性所知”的涵义、“德性所知”与“诚明所知”和“天德良知”之间的关系、“德性所知”与“德性之知”的区别三个问题为中心,对学术界有关张载认识论的研究进行了回顾,并结合明清学者的注释,对这些问题和争论做了反思,认为必须回到经典之中去,在对张载思想进行更全面更深入的研究基础上,方能对其认识论有一更为准确的理解。     

The implications of dialogicality for ‘giving voice’ in social representations research

Social representations research is often undertaken by scholars who seek to ‘give voice’ to knowledge(s) that are held by socially disenfranchised individuals and groups. However, this endeavour poses a number of problems in practice, not least because it assumes that the ‘voices’ voiced by individuals and/or groups in social research will be unambiguous and uniform, and unchanged by the research encounter. Despite the growth of attention to the critical potential of social representations theory, there remains a lack of scholarship on the relationship between the theory's emphasis on the relational, or dialogical, nature of social life (the Ego‐Alter‐Object relation) and the implications of this for critical research. In this article, I argue that the dialogical epistemology from which social representations research must depart incites reflection upon (i) the design of empirical studies, which must equally attend to both ‘Ego’ and ‘Alter’, and (ii) the researcher‐researched relationship, which may itself be best viewed as an Ego‐Alter interaction. I make the case for adopting dialogical epistemology in critical social psychology, and argue that this is essential to undertaking ethical social research. I conclude by suggesting that claims to ‘giving voice’ have little place in critical social psychology in general, and social representations scholarship in particular.     

钱穆的人文历史认识思想述论

钱穆是中国近现代史学史上儒家人文主义史学家的代表 ,他从历史的人文性和人文科学认识的独特性对历史认识问题作了阐述。他继承和发展了中国传统哲学的认识论思想 ,探讨了认识的起源和形成 ,阐发了在人文界认识的体用不二性和人文性。他深入分析了人文科学的认识方式及其特征 ,即重经验、直觉和综括 ,寓价值观与仁慈心 ,这和自然科学认识方式是绝然不同的。进而他还就历史认识的主观性进行了具体分析。钱穆的人文历史认识思想既有积极合理的方面 ,也有局限和错误 ,需要正确分析对待。     

哈贝马斯对社会科学的方法论反思

康德对自然与精神的划界，导致价值从认识论隐退，从而使实证主义有机可乘，以知识论取代了认识论，这让哈贝马斯感到震惊，于是，哈贝马斯通过重新考察认识论，以兴趣为导向作认识的基础，力图恢复认识论的价值意义。为此，他分析西方实证主义兴起对社会科学产生的重大影响，运用自然科学的方法探究社会科学，认为把价值从社会科学中驱除的做法，危害着社会科学自身存在的价值，应该通过辨析自然科学方法使用在社会科学上的危害性，提出社会科学应该采用批判解释学，摆脱自然科学方法论阴影，从而克服社会科学所产生的危机。     

Problems in the Perinatal Prediction of Child Abuse

Summary The aim of this paper is to consider and comment criticallyupon the recommendation by some eminent authorities that effortsbe made to design and implement procedures to predict the abuseof children. My view is that this move toward prediction—‘sponsored’largely by American paediatricians—is less of a new departurethan an extension of the dominant conceptual tradition wherebychild abuse is seen as analogous to a disease. However, in spiteof its basis in a medical model, it is clear that the idea thatthe abuse of children can be accurately predicted has greatappeal for many social workers. I shall argue, however, thatserious obstacles stand in the way of prediction; that theseobstacles are insufficiently appreciated by the advocates ofprediction; and that—consequently—social workers(and others) should temper with scepticism their enthusiasmfor these developments.     

Fuzzy epistemology: Decolonizing the social sciences

This article first argues that the social sciences need to be decolonized, as the current epistemologies and research methodologies are too narrowly based on the European and North American experiences and hence unable to adequately capture non-European experiences and realities. I then argue that decolonizing dominant social science epistemology means freeing it from its Aristotelian foundation. The next step undertaken is to discuss five non-Western epistemologies from West Africa, China, Melanesia, India, and South America. Building on the work of Jimi Adesina (2002), I find that all five share a fuzzy perception of reality, allowing for statements that are non-exclusive, non-discrete, and hence fuzzy. I propose an operationalization of these fuzzy epistemologies by applying Charles Ragin's Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fscqa).